Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
3
pubmed:dateCreated
2007-2-19
pubmed:abstractText
Despite concerns about the adequacy of support provided by continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs), direct comparisons of patient characteristics and outcomes between first-generation pulsatile and second-generation nonpulsatile LVADs are absent. We hypothesized that a nonpulsatile Jarvik 2000 LVAD (Jarvik Heart, Inc, New York, NY) would result in comparable outcomes to those of similarly ill patients implanted with a pulsatile LVAD (Novacor, WorldHeart Inc, Oakland, CA; and HeartMate XVE, Thoratec, Pleasanton, CA).
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
AIM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Mar
pubmed:issn
1552-6259
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Electronic
pubmed:volume
83
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
1082-8
pubmed:dateRevised
2007-11-15
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
2007
pubmed:articleTitle
Clinical outcomes are similar in pulsatile and nonpulsatile left ventricular assist device recipients.
pubmed:affiliation
Division of Cardiology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland 21201, USA. efeller@medicine.umaryland.edu
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comparative Study, Evaluation Studies